There are many teams who gained legendary status in the WC without winning it. Obviously, they are good, but where does it belong in the WC folklore? I am sure that they are nowhere near Holland 1974, Hungry 1954 or Brazil 1982. I do believe that they are near Denmark 1986, Peru 1070 or France 1982. Note: I said similar thing about Germany 2010.
Well they are the best Columbian WC team of all time. To me what's really sad is how much further Columbia could have went if Falcao didn't get hurt they would have beaten Brazil for sure and even though they probably would have lost to Germany Columbians can certainly dream. How this Columbian team is remembered in WC folklore has much to do with how well this generation of Columbian players do in the future. Columbia is the second most populated nation in South America so Columbia should have much more success than they have had. 2014 could be remembered as the tournament when Columbia joined the stable of South American powers.
not to me ... Peru70 and France 82 >> Columbia 14, Denmark 86, Holland 98 were just also better Columbia 2014 were in the breadth of Bulgaria 94, Croatia 98, Turkey 02 and Germany 2010
In terms of entertainment, I thought Colombia 2014 was up there with Denmark 1986 and Peru 1970. They moved the ball well!! France 1982 probably was a better team, but tehy did not entertain me until the semifinal. In fact, they went about quietly throughout the tournament. The semifinal match created a myth around them and France 1984 also reinforced that rep. Bulgaria 1994 struggled through the tournament. They were helped by Maradona's suspension that gave them a chance. They would have been eliminated in the first round. No one took them seriously until they took the lead against Germany. I thought Romania 1994 was more impressive. Hagi and company were very entertaining. I actually thought Germany 2010 was better than 2014.... at least, their offense. I really enjoyed how Germany 2010 took England and Argentina apart with their quick pace and dynamic passing game. Germany 2014 never created the same excitement, except for 30 minutes against Brazil.
Agree with you on everything! I would compare this Colombia with another Pekerman team, Argentina of WC06. Excellent football and strong defending, unfortunately both could not overcome the psychological factor against the hosts.
Well I rate Bulgaria 94 and Romania 94 similarly .. up and down ... for his team quality and experience. Bular struggle with Nigeria while Romania failed to Switzeland! No clear difference! One was leading by Hag playmaking, and another by efficient striking of Stoitchkov. For Germany 2010, you are right that they might be abit better in attack, but the latest team 2014 were so well solid and organized from DF to MF overall. This team would not lose to Spain 2010 like 2010 version, for their MF
They switched from playing flair to being more practical. I rewatched bits of England-Germany in 2010. The Germans really danced around the English defenders, but England should have equalized it with the Lampard disallowed goal and Rooney(?) also hit the bar. I thought Germany 2010 was lucky to beat England even through they outplayed England with their movement of the ball and the speed of their players. Germany 2014 was a bit more..... "German". Then, they played Brazil.... their offense became a bit more "Brazilian".
I like Pekerman. But when he took Riquelme out of the game, I knew it would be an equalizer soon. I literally screamed "1--1" on the bar where I was watching when he walked off the field.
agree with you 100% there ... except the last one... haha they were not Brazilian in attack .. they were truely Germany there = kill off the chances as many as possible. Brazil attack alot but they did not often "embarrass" other team with their Killing off chances, but more with flair. The last time they smashed their opponents dearly 6-0 ot 7-1 were way back in WC1950 and 54 The highest scoring games they put up in WC was 2002 vs Costa Rica with 5-2